Somerville, Mass to recognize polyamorous partnerships

[Cekoviu]

It entrenches hierarchy, divides society, and causes political polarization and instability. It correlates with genocide and civil war as consequences.

This has been studied *at length* and proven time and time again.

Maybe the problem is inequality, not polyamory.

...polyamory would contribute to the inequality

[New haven america]

Maybe the problem is inequality, not polyamory.

...polyamory would contribute to the inequality

Why are you against this considering you subscribe ideas similar to incel and/or trad masc. beliefs?

[Greed and Death]

So If I am reading this you do not need nor desire legal rights, you just want social acceptance ?

I'm not poly (Least I don't think I am, kinda need to be in a relationship first to figure that out), but polyamory is still a massive legal gray area that the Supreme Court didn't really touch upon in their recent LGBT work/service discrimination ruling. So it still might be possible to get fired, denied services, etc... simply for being non-monogamous, as well as difficulty with parental or property rights.

Anti discrimination laws could be passed generally familial or martial status is already protected and likely would be read to protecting poly couples.

Though property rights and parental rights I will have to part ways. If my spouse and my spouse's other spouse dies in a car accident how much of my Spouse's property am I entitled to ? How much of my spouse's other spouse's property am I entitled to ? How much of my property is the other spouse's family entitled to ?

Should I be required to pay child support if exit a poly relationship where none of the children are genetically mine but I was married so the court imputes them to me ?

Marital property and parental rights as they exist now would only work with two people and would need to massively be rewritten to accommodate poly relationships.

[New haven america]

I'm not poly (Least I don't think I am, kinda need to be in a relationship first to figure that out), but polyamory is still a massive legal gray area that the Supreme Court didn't really touch upon in their recent LGBT work/service discrimination ruling. So it still might be possible to get fired, denied services, etc... simply for being non-monogamous, as well as difficulty with parental or property rights.

1. Anti discrimination laws could be passed generally familial or martial status is already protected and likely would be read to protecting poly couples.

Though property rights and parental rights I will have to part ways. If my spouse and my spouse's other spouse dies in a car accident how much of my Spouse's property am I entitled to ? How much of my spouse's other spouse's property am I entitled to ? How much of my property is the other spouse's family entitled to ?

Should I be required to pay child support if exit a poly relationship where none of the children are genetically mine but I was married so the court imputes them to me ?

2. Marital property and parental rights as they exist now would only work with two people and would need to massively be rewritten to accommodate poly relationships.

1. Sure it could, and that's probably why the town did recognize poly relationships, to take advantage of SCotUS' incredibly vague ruling in regards to the poly demographic.
2. Which is why what Somerville is doing is good, because it could help gain more traction or legal experimention in non-monogamous family laws.

[Greed and Death]

1. Anti discrimination laws could be passed generally familial or martial status is already protected and likely would be read to protecting poly couples.

Though property rights and parental rights I will have to part ways. If my spouse and my spouse's other spouse dies in a car accident how much of my Spouse's property am I entitled to ? How much of my spouse's other spouse's property am I entitled to ? How much of my property is the other spouse's family entitled to ?

Should I be required to pay child support if exit a poly relationship where none of the children are genetically mine but I was married so the court imputes them to me ?

2. Marital property and parental rights as they exist now would only work with two people and would need to massively be rewritten to accommodate poly relationships.

1. Sure it could, and that's probably why the town did recognize poly relationships, to take advantage of SCotUS' incredibly vague ruling in regards to the poly demographic.
2. Which is why what Somerville is doing is good, because it could help gain more traction or legal experimention in non-monogamous family laws.

Family law is state level not local, basically all they get is the same access to government housing as extended families.

[Ostroeuropa]

And why should women having two male partners be considered different or less likely to result in issues in the long run? I largely don't care all that much if they're balanced frankly.

So i'll clarify;

My problem is with poly relationships where there is an imbalanced number of participants because I believe their normalization is bad for society. If there's a word for that type, I promise to use it in future.

Don't know, ask the poly community, they're the one's who decided on it. Generally the response I've gotten from those who believe so is that it's because it shows the guy's truly committed to the poly lifestyle and isn't just in it to get laid by multiple women (Fun fact, a lot of poly people are actually against group sex, total downer, I agree). Basically they're trying to distance themselves from the Polygynous and Swinger communities as much as possible and part of that vetting process is trying to get men to have to deal with other men in some relationship capacity. (Which, tbh, is something I'm surprised you're not angry about considering your general beliefs on male discrimination)

Well, the problem is is that there's no single structure in poly relationships: Some are 1 person dating 2 people or maybe 20 people, some are heirarchal while others are free flowing, some are sex positive/fetishistic while others can be asexual or sex negative. Generally the terms they have for what you're talking about is what you've been using, Polygamists, Swingers, etc... (Ironically they have the same negative beliefs towards that stuff as you do)

I think normalizing one woman two man relationships would likewise be a problem in the long term for similar reasons. Two-woman two-man relationships I see no issue with.

[New haven america]

Don't know, ask the poly community, they're the one's who decided on it. Generally the response I've gotten from those who believe so is that it's because it shows the guy's truly committed to the poly lifestyle and isn't just in it to get laid by multiple women (Fun fact, a lot of poly people are actually against group sex, total downer, I agree). Basically they're trying to distance themselves from the Polygynous and Swinger communities as much as possible and part of that vetting process is trying to get men to have to deal with other men in some relationship capacity. (Which, tbh, is something I'm surprised you're not angry about considering your general beliefs on male discrimination)

Well, the problem is is that there's no single structure in poly relationships: Some are 1 person dating 2 people or maybe 20 people, some are heirarchal while others are free flowing, some are sex positive/fetishistic while others can be asexual or sex negative. Generally the terms they have for what you're talking about is what you've been using, Polygamists, Swingers, etc... (Ironically they have the same negative beliefs towards that stuff as you do)

I think normalizing one woman two man relationships would likewise be a problem in the long term for similar reasons. Two-woman two-man relationships I see no issue with.

Well congrats, we agree, lotta the poly community doesn't though and has already standardized the 1 woman 2 men dynamic in an attempt to distance themselves from the polygamist and unicorn hunter group. (Unicorn Hunters=Established M/F couple looking for another woman (The Unicorn) to join their relationship. Yes, even if it's done as a fetish that everyone consents to the poly community is generally against this)

Personally 1 man 2 women, 1 woman 2 men, 2 women 2 men, etc... IDC as long as everyone consents or is ok with the situation.

[Greed and Death]

I think normalizing one woman two man relationships would likewise be a problem in the long term for similar reasons. Two-woman two-man relationships I see no issue with.

Well congrats, we agree, lotta the poly community doesn't though and has already standardized the 1 woman 2 men dynamic in an attempt to distance themselves from the polygamist and unicorn hunter group. (Unicorn Hunters=Established M/F couple looking for another woman (The Unicorn) to join their relationship. Yes, even if it's done as a fetish that everyone consents to the poly community is generally against this)

The few times I have seen two men one woman, one of the men is a Hobosexual and the other is a glorified simp.

[The Two Jerseys]

Hobosexual

Sexual attraction to vagrants?

[Greed and Death]

Hobosexual

Sexual attraction to vagrants?

No a hobosexual is an unemployed person who uses sex to find a place to sleep at night.

https://torontosun.com/life/sex-files/a ... 0to%20stay

[Grenartia]

Why do you think this will be the case when all indications are that it won't?

It's wishful thinking and a refusal to confront reality.

If this were true, why hasn't it happened in the sexual marketplace in terms of serial monogamy and sexual encounters and so on? Why do we see far more men having no sex than women having no sex? And why did this escalate enormously after the financial crisis and practically overnight, and why does it correlate with income, if it is not *directly linked* to power and wealth and hierarchy rather than any of the face-saving excuses feminists come up with about there being something wrong with the mens personalities and waffling about how they're "entitled" (Which in the context of hierarchy, sounds awfully right wing of them doesn't it, and given that the data shows money is a good proxy for sex, is interesting)? Almost like feminism is merely a means to turn classist abuse against poor males into sexist abuse to obfuscate it?

The data doesn't lie.

Because that's already the case, most of the current poly community is highly suspicious, discouraging, and actually discriminatory towards 1 man multiple women relationships. (So much so that they don't even consider it polyamory)

Excluding V's or larger where 1 man is connected to 1 woman of the group and nothing more, a guy would generally be looked down on if they had 2+ has.

I wouldn't say its not considered poly, but everyone's wary of unicorn hunters (though I wouldn't say the poly community is as discriminatory against men as you make it seem).

Polygamy is the act of having multiple marriages, usually 1 person married to multiple people in a generally unhealthy way.

Polyamory on the other hand, is the act of having multiple partners regardless of marriage status and is much more focused on open communication/emotional openness and flexability.

Though I guess you could say it goes right down to a single... Concept. Polygamy is more often than not (And even encouraged) polygyny, while most of the polyamory isn't even willing to consider a male polyamorous unless other males are included in their dating sphere or polycule. (Like a V with 1 woman dating 2 men or a 1 man 2 woman triad where 1 woman is dating another man, etc...)

So If I am reading this you do not need nor desire legal rights, you just want social acceptance ?

I mean, familial rights definitely matter (the aforementioned case of 3rd parent adoption among others), but primarily social acceptance.

Serious question: does the town actually have the legal authority to recognize poly relationships? I'd imagine that would be something that would have to be addressed at the state level.

Unsure. It could be the case that in Massachusetts domestic partnerships are registered at the local level (wiki doesn't say anything about domestic partnerships in Mass, unfortunately), and up to local discretion.

It entrenches hierarchy, divides society, and causes political polarization and instability. It correlates with genocide and civil war as consequences.

This has been studied *at length* and proven time and time again.

Maybe the problem is inequality, not polyamory.

Bingo.

[Cetacea]

Maybe the problem is inequality, not polyamory.

...polyamory would contribute to the inequality

I recently learned that Senegal has the highest rate of Polygamous marriage in the world (35+%) AND is also considered a stable democracy.

Senegal is largely rural and I know has many issues but correlation between polyamoury and instability and civil war does not appear to be one of them.

[Diopolis]

So If I am reading this you do not need nor desire legal rights, you just want social acceptance ?

I'm not poly (Least I don't think I am, kinda need to be in a relationship first to figure that out), but polyamory is still a massive legal gray area that the Supreme Court didn't really touch upon in their recent LGBT work/service discrimination ruling. So it still might be possible to get fired, denied services, etc... simply for being non-monogamous, as well as difficulty with parental or property rights.

I would think that fired/denied services would be on dicey enough ground that it's unlikely. Parental and property rights, though, nobody has any idea how to incorporate it into law, and there really isn't going to be a legal address that isn't a total cluster.

[Greed and Death]

...polyamory would contribute to the inequality

I recently learned that Senegal has the highest rate of Polygamous marriage in the world (35+%) AND is also considered a stable democracy.

Senegal is largely rural and I know has many issues but correlation between polyamoury and instability and civil war does not appear to be one of them.

The Casamance conflict ?

[The Emerald Legion]

So we should tell people how msny people they can and cannot be miserable with?

Maximum freedom my friend. Let them have their ten thousand wives.

why is maximizing freedom a good thing?

Why wouldn't it be?

[Cekoviu]

why is maximizing freedom a good thing?

Why wouldn't it be?

freedom is not an inherently 'good' value

[The Emerald Legion]

Why wouldn't it be?

freedom is not an inherently 'good' value

It is however infinitely preferable to it's lack.

[Ethel mermania]

Why wouldn't it be?

freedom is not an inherently 'good' value

Beats slavery.

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

Why wouldn't it be?

freedom is not an inherently 'good' value

Better than the authoritarian and totalitarian alternatives in orders of magnitude.

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

https://www.metrowestdailynews.com/news/20200701/somerville-votes-to-recognize-polyamorous-domestic-partnerships-it-is-one-of-first-in-nation

The Somerville City Council unanimously approved an ordinance with language inclusive to polyamorous domestic partnerships.

On June 29, Somerville quietly became one of the first cities in the nation – if not the first – to recognize polyamorous domestic partnerships.

The historic move was a result of a few subtle language shifts. For example, instead of being defined as an “entity formed by two persons,” Somerville’s ordinance defines a domestic partnership as an “entity formed by people,” replaces “he and she” with “they,” replaces “both” with “all,” and contains other inclusive language.

On June 25, the City Council passed the ordinance recognizing domestic partnerships unanimously, and on June 29 Mayor Joe Curtatone signed it into municipal law. The city is in the process of changing the application to include space for more than two partners, but polyamorous partners will be able to file soon.

So, what say ye, NSG? Personally, as a polyamorous person, I think this is a great step forward, and hope more jurisdictions follow suit.

I'm not poly but good for them, hopefully it works out well.

[Proctopeo]

Weird, but since most people are monogamists, it won't effect that much. Not worth being concerned about, IMO.

Ruh-roh. I don't think this will end well.Last time I saw polyamory in the news, well, that was during the whole ProJared debacle. I really hope something like that doesn't happen again, especially as a result of what's happening in Somerville.

Imagine thinking the ProJared drama was bad because of polyamory, and not a guy cheating on his wife (I'm sure you'll be shocked to know that cheating is not a form of polyamory) and soliciting nudes from minors.

It was complicated. While he did cheat on his wife, apparently she was an abuser, so I can't fault him much for cheating on her with someone actually nice. The nudes blog was his only real misstep, but as he asked for people's ages before giving access, anyone underage getting in wasn't really his fault. The "soliciting nudes from minors" claims ended up being total bunk as well.

The conclusion? His (now ex) wife is an awful person, and Jared made some mistakes that made her sound trustworthy initially.

[Cekoviu]

freedom is not an inherently 'good' value

Better than the authoritarian and totalitarian alternatives in orders of magnitude.

not really no

[The Emerald Legion]

Better than the authoritarian and totalitarian alternatives in orders of magnitude.

not really no

Freedom is at times unpleasant. Most of those times are still unpleasant and oftentimes more so under authoritarian regimes.

[Nuroblav]

Better than the authoritarian and totalitarian alternatives in orders of magnitude.

not really no

I mean it depends on what situation we're talking about 'freedom'. Most of the time it's better than authoritarianism - e.g. this situation - in my opinion.

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

Better than the authoritarian and totalitarian alternatives in orders of magnitude.

not really no

Oppressing people based on who they are, what they do or what they say, no matter how relatively harmless, and having them imprisoned, killed or "disappeared" as a result is not even a remotely good alternative to freedom.

not really no

Freedom is at times unpleasant. Most of those times are still unpleasant and oftentimes more so under authoritarian regimes.

On stuff like this, you and I can wholeheartedly agree.